Digital Dentistry Daily aims to publish accurate, fair and useful information. When errors happen, we want to correct them promptly and transparently. This page explains how we handle corrections, clarifications and updates.
Our standard
If we learn that a published article contains a material factual error, misleading wording, incorrect attribution, broken context or outdated information that changes the reader’s understanding, we aim to fix it as quickly as practical.
Types of post-publication changes
- Minor edits: grammar, spelling, formatting, style or small clarifications that do not materially change meaning.
- Substantive corrections: factual errors, incorrect numbers, misidentified products, inaccurate study details, broken links to sources or misleading technical descriptions.
- Updates: new information added after publication, such as later releases, regulatory changes, company responses or additional evidence.
How corrections are handled
Minor edits may be made without a formal correction note. Substantive corrections may be reflected in the article text and, where appropriate, accompanied by a note indicating that the article was corrected or updated. The goal is to preserve clarity for readers while avoiding confusion about what changed.
When we may add clarification
Sometimes a statement is technically true but incomplete, overly broad or likely to be misunderstood. In those cases, we may add clarification language rather than issuing a formal correction note, especially when the issue is context rather than a direct factual error.
Source disputes and manufacturer feedback
If a company, researcher, clinician or reader disputes a factual claim, we may review supporting documentation, check the original source material, revise wording, request clarification, or append additional context where warranted. We are not obligated to adopt requested wording, but we do aim to assess concerns fairly.
How to report a possible error
Please contact us through the site’s contact page and include the article title or link, the specific statement in question, and any source or documentation that supports your concern. The more precise the request, the faster we can review it.
What we generally do not treat as a correction issue
Reasonable disagreement over editorial framing, workflow interpretation, product positioning or analytical judgment does not automatically mean an article is factually incorrect. We may still revise wording if we believe added clarity would help readers.